text:
Consumers' Attitudes to Support Green Energy: A Case Study in Shanghai
Experimental Flame Front Characterisation in a Lean Premix Burner Operating with Syngas Simplified Model Fuel
Pressure Pulsation and Cavitation Phenomena in a Micro-ORC System
Valencia, G.
Fontalvo, A.
Cárdenas, Y.
Duarte, J.
Isaza, C.
Energies 2019, 12(12), 2378; https://doi.org/10.3390/en12122378
Energy and Exergy Analysis of Different Exhaust Waste Heat Recovery Systems for Natural Gas Engine Based on ORC
by Guillermo Valencia 1,* , Armando Fontalvo 2 , Yulineth Cárdenas 3, Jorge Duarte 1 and Cesar Isaza 4
Programa de Ingeniería Mecánica, Universidad del Atlántico, Carrera 30 Número 8-49, Puerto Colombia, Barranquilla 080007, Colombia
Research School of Electrical, Mechanical and Material Engineering, The Australian National University, ACT 2600, Australia
Departamento de Energía, Universidad de la Costa, Barranquilla 080002, Colombia
Programa de Ingeniería Mecánica, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Medellín 050004, Colombia
Received: 18 May 2019 / Accepted: 18 June 2019 / Published: 20 June 2019
Waste heat recovery (WHR) from exhaust gases in natural gas engines improves the overall conversion efficiency. The organic Rankine cycle (ORC) has emerged as a promising technology to convert medium and low-grade waste heat into mechanical power and electricity. This paper presents the energy and exergy analyses of three ORC–WHR configurations that use a coupling thermal oil circuit. A simple ORC (SORC), an ORC with a recuperator (RORC), and an ORC with double-pressure (DORC) configuration are considered; cyclohexane, toluene, and acetone are simulated as ORC working fluids. Energy and exergy thermodynamic balances are employed to evaluate each configuration performance, while the available exhaust thermal energy variation under different engine loads is determined through an experimentally validated mathematical model. In addition, the effect of evaporating pressure on the net power output, thermal efficiency increase, specific fuel consumption, overall energy conversion efficiency, and exergy destruction is also investigated. The comparative analysis of natural gas engine performance indicators integrated with ORC configurations present evidence that RORC with toluene improves the operational performance by achieving a net power output of 146.25 kW, an overall conversion efficiency of 11.58%, an ORC thermal efficiency of 28.4%, and a specific fuel consumption reduction of 7.67% at a 1482 rpm engine speed, a 120.2 L/min natural gas flow, 1.784 lambda, and 1758.77 kW of mechanical engine power.
energy analysis; exergy analysis; organic Rankine cycle; waste heat recovery; natural gas engine
The technological advances developed in organic Rankine cycles (ORC) applied to waste heat recovery (WHR) systems could become a promising feature for the engine manufacturing industry due to its capacity to reduce fuel consumption, increase net power output, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions [1].
ORC is considered as a feasible tool to increase overall conversion efficiency in industrial processes due to its capacity to recover energy from alternative sources, such as exhaust gases, cooling water, or lubricating oil, by using organic working fluids [2]. Furthermore, ORC configuration can be modified to maximize overall engine–ORC system performance by optimizing net power output, first law, and exergy efficiencies and minimizing exergy destruction [3]. Nevertheless, ORC–engine coupling must be carefully designed to avoid safety, performance, and revenue issues such as gas–fluid contact, as well as weight, complexity, and backpressure increase [4].
ORC–WHR research has addressed the integration between ORC and combustion engines. Plenty of studies have established that ORC improves the overall conversion efficiency by increasing net power production without penalizing fuel consumption. Patel and Doyle [5] presented a first attempt for WHR from diesel engines by using ORC. Their ORC system achieved an overall power increase of 13% in a Mack 676 diesel vehicle engine without increasing fuel consumption. Peris et al. [6] simulated six ORC configurations for WHR from cooling water in internal combustion engines (ICE) by using 10 non-flammable fluids. Their study showed that ICE electric efficiency could be increased by 4.9–5.3%, by achieving overall conversion efficiencies up to 7.15% at a relatively low-temperature cooling water (90 °C). Yu et al. [7] simulated a diesel engine–ORC integration for WHR from the engine exhaust gases and cooling system by using R245fa as the ORC working fluid. Their results showed that 75% of exhaust gases energy and 9.5% of cooling water energy could be recovered if ORC operating conditions are optimized and controlled to maintain the power output. However, these results are limited to an exergetic analysis of a single ORC configuration. Lu et al. [8] proposed an integrated diesel internal combustion engine and simple ORD (SORC) with solids adsorption technology for waste heat recovery from the cooling system and the engine exhaust gases. Their results showed a maximum recoverable power from the cooling process and exhaust systems of 67.9 kW and 82.7 kW, respectively.
Vaja and Gambarotta [9] evaluated the performance of SORC and ORC with a recuperator (RORC) configurations for WHR in a stationary 2.9-MW ICE at a single operation point. The results showed an increase of 12% in the overall efficiency of the system. Kalina [10] investigated the performance of a biomass power generation plant. The plant consisted of two natural gas ICE coupled to a biomass gasifier and an ORC. The ORC system was used as a WHR system to produce power from the engine's exhaust line and cooling system. Mingshan et al. [11] analyzed a combined heavy-duty diesel engine–SORC system for WHR. This system achieved a heat recovery efficiency between 10–15% when the heat exchanger operation is optimized. This publication also evaluated the engine operation under partial load conditions with a medium–high power condition. They concluded that variations in engine rotational speed must be determined to evaluate the true performance of the combined system.
Regarding ORC and stationary compressed natural gas (CNG) engines integration, two approaches have been studied: the use of multiple temperature loops for WHR from the engine intercooler, cooling system, and exhaust gases, and the use of single-temperature loops for WHR from engine exhaust. Within the first approach, Yao et al. [12] were the first ones to propose an ORC system for WHR from the engine intercooler, exhaust gases, and cooling system by using a low and a high-temperature loop. Their ORC system used R245fa and achieved 10.8% thermal efficiency and 26.9 kW of power, which increased overall power production by 33.7%, keeping the same fuel consumption. Yang et al. [13] optimized Yao's ORC configuration by using a genetic algorithm, but their reported performance was lower than Yao's results: 8.8–10.2% thermal efficiency and 23.6-kW net power output. Yao's configuration was studied again by Yang et al. [14] and analyzed the thermodynamic performance of the ORC with double-pressure configuration (DORC) operating with six working fluid groups integrated into a compressed natural gas engine, but performance indicators such as the waste heat recovery efficiency and specific fuel consumption were not considered. Wang et al. [15] also studied a dual-loop ORC system for WHR in stationary CNG engines but using R1233zd and R1234yf as working fluids and two recovery heat exchangers to increase ORC efficiency. The results showed that ORC efficiency was 10–14% when R1233zd was used in the high-temperature loop, and R1234yf was used in the low-temperature loop.
Within the second approach, Han et al. [16] carried out a dynamic simulation of an ORC with a double piston expander and R245ca as a working fluid. Their system took advantage of the engine exhaust gases to produce power in the ORC piston expander and compress the engine natural gas. However, they focused on the component efficiencies and compression benefits, but their study did not report overall efficiency values. Song et al. [17] proposed an RORC working with R416A as the ORC fluid. Their results showed that this approach increased the overall conversion efficiency by 6%. Liu et al. [18] examined the effect of engine load on the performance of an ORC cycle combined with a stationary motor and R245fa as the working fluid. Their results showed ORC efficiencies between 16.3–25.9% when the engine load varies between 40–100%, respectively.
The selection of ORC working fluid is a key design step because it defines the operation limits and the power production potential. However, publications have shown that working fluid selection depends on the heat source and temperature limits. Chacartegui et al. [19] studied a low-temperature SORC configuration in medium and large-scale combined cycle plants for WHR from commercial gas turbines. Their study considered R-113, R-245, isobutene, toluene, cyclohexane, and isopentane as working fluids. The results showed that toluene and cyclohexane achieved the highest combined cycle efficiency—up to 60%--which is high global efficiency in this process. Qiu et al. [20] examined the experimental integration of a small-scale thermoelectric generation with a dual ORC. Drescher and Brüggemann [21] performed a screening of suitable organic working fluids for biomass-fired applications. Their selection involved critical temperature and pressure, dryness, turbine and pump efficiencies, and autoignition temperature. However, they obtained a group of suitable fluids rather than an optimum working fluid. Mago et al. [22] studied the effect of working fluid selection on the ORC performance at different heat source temperatures, supporting Drescher and Brüggemann's conclusions.
Kosmadakis et al. [23] tested more than 30 organic fluids and stated that R245fa is a suitable working fluid for ORC applications with ICE in terms of net power and thermal efficiency, but its use is restricted as international standards promotes low global warming potential (GWP) organic substances. Regarding solar thermal energy conversion, Tchance et al. [24] established that R134a is a suitable fluid due to its low toxicity and flammability, in addition to the high-pressure ratio and efficiency that can be achieved. Tian et al. [25] performed a energy analysis of a combined diesel ICE–SORC system to evaluate 20 different working fluids in terms of net output power and thermal efficiency. The study showed that R-141b showed the highest net power output (60 kJ/kg), but R-123 achieved the highest thermal efficiency (16.60%). Hung et al. [26] investigated an SORC integrated into a solar ventilation system. Their results showed an overall efficiency increase of 6.2%. Zare [27] evaluated the revenue of three ORC geothermal plants. They showed that the RORC configuration improves thermal efficiency, but requires additional components, increasing the total exergy destroyed, and affecting the overall exergy efficiency. This trend was confirmed by Fontalvo et al. [28], who evaluated three ORC configurations for low-temperature WHR and showed that SORC had the highest revenue because the additional equipment increases the exergy destruction of the system.
Exergy analysis is an important tool to identify key design aspects that may improve overall conversion efficiency and maximize resource utilization. ORC research has shown that exergy analysis can be used to provide guidelines in ORC design for a wide range of heat sources. In addition, the calculation of exergoeconomic costs aims to set an economic value for materials and energy flows, providing a reasonable base for the allocation of economic resources [29]. Kerme and Orfi [30] evaluated the effect of the turbine inlet temperature on the exergy efficiency of an ORC driven by solar collectors. As a result, they showed that an increase in turbine inlet temperature increases exergy efficiency and reduces exergy destruction. The conservation of natural resources, the limited availability of spaces to generate energy through some renewable sources, cost savings, policies, and the national regulatory framework are some of the most important factors that encourage the research of a more efficient energy generation process for internal combustion engines [31].
The main contribution of this paper is to present the comparative analysis results of some energetic and exergetic performance indicators of a 2-MW natural gas engine integrated with waste heat recovery systems based on SORC, RORC, and DORC configurations with different organic working fluids such as toluene, cyclohexane, and acetone. The maximum net output power of the bottoming ORC cycle was studied for differents engine load percentages, which implied studying the exhaust gas thermodynamic properties and engine thermal performance in detail. Also, parametric studies are developed to identify the influence of evaporation pressure on exergy destruction for each component, and performance indicator. These result help obtain the best ORC operational condition and configuration in terms of rational use of energy and environment preservation by increasing the overall energy and exergy efficiency of the Jenbacher JMS 612 GS-N. L natural gas engine of 2 MW with the bottoming ORC cycle.
2.1. Description of the System
This section presents a general description of the 2-MW natural gas engine and each ORC configuration and operation. In this study, a Jenbacher JMS 612 GS-N. L engine (Figure 1) is considered to evaluate the ORC–WHR systems. The main design and operation engine parameters are summarized in Table 1. Fuel composition and air–fuel mixture supply conditions for the studied plastic production plant are presented in Table 2. The air–fuel mixture conditions are set to obtain an optimum flammable gas–air mixture and an exhaust gas temperature of 420–460 °C after the turbocharger expander.
2.2. Description of the SORC, RORC, and DORC
The studied ORC configurations are presented in Figure 2 and are based on the previous work of Fontalvo et al. [28]. The SORC physical structure is shown in Figure 2a. SORC operation is as follows: an air–fuel mixture (stream 1) is compressed to mixing conditions (stream 6) and supplied to the combustion chamber. The exhaust gases at the manifold outlet (stream 9) are expanded at the turbocharger expansion stage (stream 10) before they transfer heat to the thermal oil circuit at the shell and tube heat exchanger (ITC 1), and they are finally sent to the atmosphere (stream 11). In the thermal oil circuit, the oil that receives heat from the exhaust gasses (stream 1 AT) is used to preheat (zone 1), evaporate (zone 2), and superheat (zone 3) the ORC working fluid in the evaporation unit (ITC 2) before it is pumped (streams 3AT) and sent to the shell and tube heat exchanger (ITC 1). In the SORC, the high-pressure organic working fluid (1 ORC) is expanded at the ORC turbine (T 1) to the SORC lowest pressure (2 ORC) before it is cooled down and condensed (ITC 3). Then, the fluid is pumped to the ORC highest pressure (4 ORC) and sent back to the preheating, evaporating, and superheating zones to complete the cycle.
The ORC configuration with internal heat recovery (RORC) is shown in Figure 2b. This configuration is based on the SORC presented above, but an internal recovery unit (RC) is included in the ORC system to improve conversion efficiency by using the turbine outlet stream (2 ORC stream) to preheat the fluid in the pump outlet stream (5 ORC) before it enters the preheating zone in the evaporation heat exchanger (ITC 2).
The DORC configuration is shown in Figure 2c. This configuration uses two evaporating pressures and requires two evaporation units (ITC 2, ITC 4), two pumps (B 2, B 3), two turbines (T 1, T 2), and one condenser (ITC 3). In the DORC configuration, the thermal oil that leaves the pump (stream 3 AT) is heated by the exhaust gases (stream 10) in the shell and tube heat exchanger (ITC 1) before it is sent to the high-pressure evaporation unit (ITC 4) where the thermal oil (stream 1 AT) is used to preheat, evaporate, and superheat the high-pressure ORC working fluid (stream 6 ORC). Then, the thermal oil leaving the high-pressure evaporation unit (stream 1-2 AT) is used to preheat, evaporate, and superheat the mid-pressure ORC fluid (stream 5" ORC) in the mid-pressure evaporation unit (ITC 2). In the ORC system, the high-pressure working fluid (stream 6 ORC) enters the first turbine stage (T 2), where it is expanded to the system middle pressure and mixed with the fluid (stream 2 ORC), leaving the mid-pressure evaporation unit. The mixed fluid (stream 2" ORC) enters the second turbine stage (T 1) where it is expanded to the system lowest pressure (stream 3 ORC) before it is cooled down and condensed (ITC 3). Then, the fluid is pumped to the ORC middle pressure (5 ORC) before it is split (streams 5' ORC and 5" ORC). Stream 5' is pumped to the system highest pressure and sent back to the high evaporation unit, while stream 5" is sent to the mid-pressure evaporation unit to complete the cycle. According to the literature, the DORC configuration increases the efficiency of the cycle by decreasing the thermal load dissipated to the environment [32].
3. Thermodynamic Modeling
Energy and exergy analyses are conducted for the ORC–WHR configurations by applying the first and second law of thermodynamics to each component in the configurations. In addition, a definition of Fuel-Product is presented for each configuration component, as well as first and second law performance metrics.
3.1. Energy Analysis
Every single ORC–WHR system component is considered as a control volume. Mass and energy balances are applied to each component according to Equations (1) and (2), respectively.
∑ m ˙ i n − ∑ m ˙ o u t = 0
∑ m ˙ i n h i n − ∑ m ˙ o u t h o u t + ∑ Q ˙ + ∑ W ˙ = 0
where m ˙ is the mass flow rate, h is the fluid specific enthalpy, and Q ˙ . and W ˙ are the heat flow rate output and power inputs, respectively. Steady-state operation is assumed for each ORC component.
3.2. Exergy Analysis
The specific exergy is calculated by neglecting the variation of kinetic and potential energy, and it is calculated according to Equation (3):
ex = (h − h0) − T0(s − s0)
where h 0 and s 0 are the reference state enthalpy and entropy, respectively, which are calculated at the reference conditions of T 0 = 298.15 K and P 0 = 101.325 kPa . The chemical exergy of the exhaust gases (stream 10) is calculated according to Equation (4) by considering a mixture of gases from the fuel combustion.
e x G c h = ∑ i = 1 n X i e x c h i + R T 0 ∑ i = 1 n X i l n X i , .
where X i is the molar fraction and ex ch i is the exergy per mol unit for each gas.
The exergy balance is applied to each ORC–WHR system component by means of Equation (5) [33]:
∑ m ˙ i n e x i n − ∑ m ˙ o u t e x o u t + Q ˙ ( 1 − T 0 T ) − W ˙ − E x ˙ D = 0
where m ˙ i n e x i n is the fluid incoming exergy flow, m ˙ o u t e x o u t is the fluid outcoming exergy flow, and E ˙ x D is the exergy destruction.
Three performance metrics are used for the ORC–WHR systems: cycle thermal efficiency ( η I , c ) , heat recovery efficiency ( ε h r ) , and overall energy conversion efficiency ( η I , o v e r a l l ) [34]. Cycle thermal efficiency is calculated by means of Equation (6), while heat recovery efficiency is calculated using Equation (7), and overall energy conversion efficiency is calculated as shown in Equation (8).
η I , C = W ˙ n e t Q G ˙
ε h r = Q G ˙ m ˙ 10 C P 10 ( T 10 − T 0 )
η I , o v e r a l l = η I , C · ε h r
Similarly, the absolute increase in thermal efficiency is calculated using Equation (9), which relates the ORC net power output and fuel energy. This indicator determines the improvement in the ICE performance by using a WHR–ORC recovery system.
Δ η t h e r m a l = W ˙ n e t m ˙ f u e l · L H V
Due to the ORC power output, there is a lower brake-specific fuel consumption (BSFC), which is calculated by Equation (10) [15]. The absolute decrease in specific fuel consumption is determined by Equation (11), which represents the reduction in fuel consumption at any particular operating conditions of the power generation engine:
B S F C O R C − e n g i n e = m ˙ f u e l W ˙ e n g i n e + W ˙ n e t
Δ B S F C = | B S F C O R C − e n g i n e − B S F C e n g i n e | B S F C e n g i n e ⋅ 100
The exergy efficiency based on the second law of thermodynamics ( η I I , O R C ) . is calculated as shown in Equation (12):
η I I , O R C = E ˙ x p r o d u c e d E ˙ x s u p p l i e d
where E ˙ x s u p p l i e d is the exergy supplied to the system and E ˙ x p r o d u c e d is the exergy recovered by the system. Exergy efficiency can be expressed as a function of the destroyed exergy E ˙ D by means of Equation (13):
η I I , O R C = 1 − E ˙ x D E ˙ x s u p p l i e d
Simulating each WHR–ORC configuration, the following assumptions were considered:
Pressure drops in pipelines are neglected.
Pressure drops in heat exchangers are calculated as a function of the equipment geometry and the hydraulic flow characteristics.
All the WHR–ORC components of the cycle are thermally insulated.
The thermal oil circuit absorbs temperature variations in exhaust gases to obtain steady-state operation in each ORC configuration.
A simulation program with the energy and exergy analyses was written in MATLAB R2018b® [35], and the thermodynamic properties were calculated by using REFPROP 9.0® [36]. The detailed equations of energy balances applied to each configuration are shown in Appendix A, Table A1.
A specific engine operating condition is selected (see Table 3) to make it possible to compare each of the simulation results for each configuration. Values in Table 3 are also selected because it represents the system operation in off-grid mode. The engine performance indicators for the selected base conditions are shown in Table 4, which are expected to be evaluated with each configuration. The design parameters considered for the WHR–ORC simulations are shown in Table 5. In addition, the input–output structure for the components of the proposed WHR–ORC systems is shown as in Table 6, as the exergy losses must be differentiated from the exergy destroyed in each configuration [37].
The SORC simulation model is validated by conducting a comparative analysis using previously reported results from Vaja and Gambarotta [9] and Tian et al. [25]. The main parameters considered in both references are shown in Table 7. Two working fluids are considered: R-11 and R-134a, and ORC thermal efficiencies are determined as a function of the turbine inlet pressure.
The validation results in Figure 3 evidence that the SORC model is accurate enough when it is compared to previous results from references [9] and [25]. When results are compared to Vaja and Gambarotta [9], the error is below 3% for R-11, below 6% for R-134a when the turbine inlet pressure is up to 1 MPa, and less than 3% when the turbine inlet pressure is above 2 MPa for R-134a. The pressure range in this study is set as 2.5–3 MPa; therefore, it can be observed that the relative error in Figure 3 is below 1% compared to that of Huan Tian et al. [25], which guarantees the accuracy of the results.
For RORC model validation, the results of this system for a geothermal application were taken from Emam et al. [39] and Zare et al. [27]. The parameters considered for both investigations are shown in Table 7. The following considerations were assumed to perform the comparative analysis of the RORC:
The processes and subsystems are assumed to be in steady state.
All devices were considered in adiabatic conditions.
Pressure drops in ORC devices and pipelines are neglected.
The reference temperature for exergy calculations is 288 K.
Validation results for RORC are shown as in Table 8. A good agreement can be seen between this study and the previously published ORC performances from Emam et al. [39] and Zare et al. [27]. For isobutane, error ranges between 0.62–0.73% for thermal efficiency. On the other hand, exergy efficiency relative error is between 0.18–0.35%.
From the simulation results obtained, it is possible to determine and calculate the stream and fluid properties for the proposed SORC, RORC, and DORC configurations. Detailed simulation results are shown in Appendix B, Table A2 for the case of SORC. A summary of the main results obtained for the engine WHR system is shown in Table 9.
Results from the exergy analysis are presented in Table 10. Results in this table are calculated through the input–output definition in every component of the SORC configuration. The exergy destruction fraction in each component of the cycle is calculated from the results of the input–output definition and the exergy destruction percentages are presented in Figure 4a.
It is observed that the shell and tube heat exchanger (ITC 1) has the highest exergy destruction by achieving 32.5% of the cycle's exergy destruction, followed by the evaporation unit (ITC 2) with 28.3%, and the condenser (ITC 3) with 27.9%. On the other hand, pumps show the lowest exergy destruction contribution. Due to operational restrictions on the turbine inlet organic fluid temperature, it is not possible to reduce the evaporation unit minimum temperature to obtain less generation of entropy and less exergy destruction in this equipment. Nevertheless, these temperature differences in heat exchangers can be optimized for better performance.
The use of isentropic or dry fluids in the RORC configuration allows obtaining superheated and relatively high-temperature conditions at the turbine outlet (2 ORC stream) [40]. This is the case of organic fluid toluene in RORC, as shown in Appendix B, Table A3. Therefore, the recovery heat exchanger (RC) uses this energy at the turbine outlet to preheat the stream leaving the pump (6 ORC stream) [41]. This preheating strategy [42] increases the thermal efficiency by 2.6%, while in SORC, the increase is 1.8%. Thus, the whole engine–WHR–RORC configuration shows a specific fuel consumption of 166.21 g/kWh, which is 2% less than the engine–WHR–SORC specific fuel consumption as shown in Table 10 by using the same fluid and operation conditions.
It can be seen that the ORC performance increases when the recovery heat exchanger (RC) is included, as it increases the turbine power output for the same heat input from the exhaust gases. The efficiency improvement is strongly related to fluid properties, especially to specific heat [43]. The results confirm that the recovery system does not affect the turbine power output or pump power consumption, but it modifies heat transfer in both the evaporation unit and the condenser [44], which have the highest exergy destruction, as shown in Table 11.
The exergy destruction contribution in each cycle component is presented in Figure 4b. From this figure, it can be seen that the exergy destruction is 33.82 kW (35.2%) in the evaporator, followed by the recuperator with 21.86 kW (22.8%). Also, it can be seen that pump contribution to exergy destruction is only 0.5%.
For the DORC configuration, there are two different evaporating pressures; however, the 2 ORC, 2' ORC, and 2" ORC streams are mixed at the same pressure, and then enter the turbine (T1). In addition, at the low-pressure pump outlet (B2), the states 5 ORC, 5' ORC, and 5" ORC have similar thermodynamic properties with different mass flow rates, as shown in Appendix B, in Table A4.
Table 9 presents the performance metrics of engine–WHR–DORC. It can be observed that this configuration only achieves an overall energy conversion efficiency of 6.68% and an overall exergy efficiency of 34.37% at the test conditions. According to Guzovi [45], these results are strongly related to the selected pressure ratio values, and this configuration presents better exergy efficiency and generates more power output than the SORC and the RORC configurations. In this configuration, the high-pressure evaporator (ITC 4) along with the shell and tube heat exchanger (ITC1) show the highest exergy destruction, as shown in Table 12, which can be explained by the temperature differences between the thermal oil and the organic fluid.
The component exergy destruction contribution to the WHR–DORC system is shown in Figure 4c. From this figure, the evaporators and condensers' contribution is 86.4% of the total exergy destruction. As the organic fluid is evaporated in the heat exchangers, a closer match can be maintained between the thermal oil cooling temperature profile and the ORC working fluid temperature profile, which reduces exergy losses.
4.1. Sensitivity Analysis
4.1.1. Effect of Evaporation Pressure
Considering the relevance of the evaporation pressure on the operation of these systems, a comparative analysis of the net power, an absolute increase of thermal efficiency, and absolute decrease of the specific fuel consumption is presented in Figure 5 for each engine–WHR–ORC configuration. For the DORC, high evaporation pressure is reached by changing the pressure ratio at the B3 pump, while the pressure ratio at the B2 pump is kept fixed at three for toluene, 10 for acetone, and 1.5 for cyclohexane.
It is observed that the net power output is strongly related to the evaporation pressure, achieving the most profitable results for the toluene–RORC at an evaporation pressure of 3.4 MPa: 146.25 kW of net power, which is up to 31.9% more power than the toluene–SORC net power at the same evaporation pressure. It is not possible to achieve the same evaporating pressure in the DORC by changing the B3 pump pressure ratio, because the fluid temperature would be so high that the heat transfer in the evaporation unit will be reversed.
When comparing the absolute increase in thermal efficiency for the three ORC configurations, Figure 5b shows that the evaporating pressure increases thermal efficiency up to an upper limit [46,47]. For toluene at 3.4 MPa, the SORC increases engine efficiency by 2.44%, while the RORC increases it by 3.22%. Working fluids such as acetone and cyclohexane in the SORC achieve an absolute thermal efficiency increase of 2.15% and 2.09%, respectively. Therefore, toluene stands out as the working fluid that presents the best results performance. Furthermore, as the main objective of this research is to increase the overall conversion efficiency by generating additional power, a RORC is the best option, regardless of the working fluid. This is supported by Figure 5, where the highest specific fuel consumption reduction is 5.92% for the toluene–SORC combination and 7.67% for the toluene–RORC combination, while the lowest specific fuel consumption reduction is achieved by the acetone–SORC cycle, which is 0.78% at 0.2 MPa. However, it is important to mention that as the heat in the evaporator increases, the size of the evaporation unit in the RORC will increase the purchase equipment cost and reduce the revenue of the system.
By evaluating the overall energy conversion efficiency, as shown in Figure 5d, the toluene–SORC and the cyclohexane–SORC combinations achieve 8.78% and 7.54%, respectively, with 3.4 MPa. For the RORC configuration, acetone achieved the lowest efficiency (4.91%), which confirms that toluene is the potential fluid to be used in SORC and RORC.
The results also show that the toluene–RORC combination increases thermal efficiency from 21.53% to 28.41%, and increases global exergy efficiency from 45.29% to 59.76%, which confirms that toluene stands out among the studied fluids, at relatively low pressures.
The maximum net power output in the toluene–SORC combination represents 8.31% of the stationary motor-generating capacity at nominal speed. In addition, it is observed that toluene–SORC working at evaporation pressures between 2–3 MPa increases the net power output by 5.49% and up to 109.3 kW. The absolute increase in thermal efficiency goes up to 5.26%. Finally, the specific fuel consumption reduction increases by 5.21%. On the other hand, the increases for these variables in the RORC are 3.76%, 3.75%, and 3.47%, which allows us to conclude that toluene–SORC is the combination that stands out when considering this variable.
4.1.2. Analysis of the Influence of Evaporation Pressure on the Destruction of Exergy Configurations
To perform a comparative analysis of the exergetic performance for each ORC configuration, the fractions of exergy destruction in each component of the cycle were calculated with the three proposed working fluids. The exergy destruction fractions for each ORC configuration are shown in Figure 6, at different evaporating pressures for acetone, cyclohexane, and toluene.
The results demonstrate that the exergy fractions for the DORC cycle are higher than those for the SORC cycle, while the RORC cycle has the lowest values of total exergy loss.
After the evaluation of the average decrease in the percentage points of the three configurations studied to the engine operating condition, it was demonstrated that the DORC cycle working with toluene presents an average of 74.02% total exergy destruction, which is more significant than the exergy destruction in the RORC configuration. These results are due to the DORC configurations leading to higher exergy destruction by having more components. However, in an operational range of evaporating pressure, the dual ORC exceeds the destroyed exergy of the SORC by 9%. Consequently, the evaporating pressure must be determined for each specific case to achieve the highest turbine output power, and thus the greater exergetic efficiency of the system.
The DORC configuration presents the highest values of exergy destruction fractions operating with acetone within the temperature range of the source studied, while the SORC configuration presents the lowest values of the exergy destruction fraction. As a result, the SORC configuration delivers more power with the least heat rejection in the condenser; additionally, for the same power delivered, this configuration requires less heat from the heat source. The results also show that the evaporating pressure in the different ORC configurations has a significant effect on the total dimensionless exergy losses, with a minimum value that is within the studied range.
The maximum values of exergy losses occurred in the condenser for every configuration, with a maximum value of 88.26% for the SORC at 0.803 MPa. As a result, the exergy destruction fractions in the condenser is inversely proportional to the evaporating pressure as it approaches 2 MPa. Due to the significant increase in exergy losses, the recuperator acquires importance in the evaporator and turbine cycle in the RORC, while in the dual cycle, the low evaporator provides exergy destruction as the pressure increases.
4.1.3. Analysis of the Influence of Engine Load on Energy Performance
This section analyzes the effect of engine load on the performance of the heat recovery system. The results presented above were obtained based on the typical operating condition of a natural gas engine. The engine power control system adjusts internal engine variables such as mixture pressure, temperature, and mixture recirculation percentage to provide high efficiency in operations with partial engine loads. The global energy indicators were selected as study variables, and the results of the three configurations under study for an evaporating pressure of 675.8 kPa working with toluene are shown as in Figure 7. For safety reasons, all the possible operating points of the proposed configurations at different engine loads guarantee that toluene vaporizes completely at the evaporator outlet in order to prevent corrosion of the liquid in the expander. Moreover, the engine exhaust gas temperature at the evaporator outlet (stream 11) must be higher than the acid spray temperature (200 °C) to prevent the acid corrosion of the exhaust.
The thermal efficiency presents a directly proportional relationship with respect to the engine load increases, while the overall energy conversion efficiency presents an inversely proportional relationship. The maximum net output power obtained for configurations at engine load percentages is SORC (89.4 kW—97.9%), RORC (124.5 kW—97.9%), and DORC (86.29 kW—91.81%). However, in an engine operating interval, the thermal efficiency increase as the RORC configuration increases first and then decreases, presenting a maximum performance with 82.68% engine load.
These results are due to the engine load being directly related to the flow in the exhaust gases and the energy loss in the recuperator since the evaporation pressure and the temperatures of the thermal coupling oil have been restricted. As the operating load increases, there is an increase in the evaporation temperature of the organic fluid. Therefore, the power increases, which is the main factor that affects the thermal and exergetic efficiency. However, the isentropic efficiency of the turbine decreases slightly as a consequence of the increase in the temperature of the thermal oil, causing a decrease in the indicators at high engine loads. The direct relation between the net power and the engine load is also due to the increase of the thermal oil inlet temperature to the evaporator, which leads to an increase in the mass flow of toluene, and the enthalpy difference between the pump and the turbine; however, this causes a stronger effect in the turbine.
This study performed an energy and exergey analysis of three ORC systems for WHR from the exhaust gases of a 2-MW Jenbacher JMS 612 GS-N. L natural gas as a stationary engine at a plastic industry located at Barranquilla, Colombia. In particular, a validated thermodynamic model was employed to determine the net power output, fuel consumption, and thermal and exergy efficiency of the proposed engine–WHR–configurations based on the mean variables of the system. The study involved the calculation of energy and exergy performance metrics for the proposed systems to determine the improvement of the stationary engine overall energy conversion.
To improve the system performance, the irreversibilities and exergy destruction of the components must be reduced. The exergy destruction of all the elements in the proposed configurations is lower than the thermal oil pump (B1). These values suggest that reducing the heat transfer area in the evaporator, recuperator, and condenser may provide a favorable solution, especially in the DORC configuration. However, it is important to point out that these plate heat exchangers are manufactured from specialized materials, which contributes to the total purchase equipment cost. Also, the operation of these components has a significant effect on the total exergy destruction and thermal efficiency as a result of the pinch point temperature. Therefore, increasing the heat exchangers area increases the cost of generating electricity.
The thermal oil pump is the component with the lowest efficiency: SORC (16%), RORC (26%), and DORC (17%). However, among the heat exchange equipment, the shell and tube heat exchanger (ITC1) has the lowest exergy efficiency: SORC (37%), RORC (44%), and DORC (38%), because the organic fluid cannot reach the engine exhaust gas temperature levels, as heat transfer irreversibilities will increase and due to thermal stability conditions. Hence, these alternatives present better results for medium and low-temperature exhaust gases. Heat exchanger ITC1 has the highest contribution to exergy destruction for SORC and DORC, while the evaporation unit (ITC2) shows the highest contribution for RORC. Therefore, special effort should be focused to reduce the exergy destruction in these components. Based on commercial information about the geometric characteristics of plate heat exchangers and shell and tube heat exchangers, optimal sizes of these components should be determined to reduce cost and increase performance.
The highest specific fuel consumption reduction was 5.92% for the toluene–SORC combination, and 7.67% for the toluene–RORC combination. Also, the thermal efficiency (28.41%) and global exergy efficiency (59.76%) confirm that toluene–RORC assembly is the best alternative for this natural gas engine.
Conceptualization: G.V.; Methodology: G.V., J.D. and A.F.; Software: G.V., A.F. and Y.C.; Validation: G.V., A.F. and Y.C.; Formal Analysis: G.V., J.D. and C.I.; Investigation: G.V.; Resources: G.V. and J.D.; Writing-Original Draft Preparation: G.V.,A.F; Writing-Review & Editing: J.D. and C.I.; Funding Acquisition: G.V.
This work was supported by the Universidad del Atlántico through the "PRIMERA CONVOCATORIA INTERNA PARA APOYO AL DESARROLLO DE TRABAJOS DE GRADO EN INVESTIGACIÓN FORMATIVA—NIVEL PREGRADO Y POSGRADO 2018", Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana and the E2 Energía Eficiente S.A E.S. P company.
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
BSFC Brake-specific fuel consumption
DORC Double pressure organic Rankine cycle
GHG Greenhouse gases
GWP Global warming potential
ICE Internal combustion engine
ORC Organic Rankine cycle
RORC Recuperator organic Rankine cycle
SORC Simple organic Rankine Cycle
WHR Waste heat recovery
C p Specific heat at constant pressure ( J / kg K )
E Energy (J)
e x Specific exergy ( kJ / kg )
h Specific enthalpy ( kJ / kg )
L H V Heating power ( kJ / kg )
m Mass ( kg )
m ˙ Mass flow rate ( kg / s )
Q Heat ( J )
R Universal gas constant ( atm L / mol K ) .
r p m Rotational engine speed (rpm)
T Temperature ( K )
t Time ( s )
W ˙ Power (kW)
X i Molar gas fraction
η I , c Thermal efficiency of the cycle
η I , o v e r a l l Overall energy conversion efficiency
η I I , O R C Exergetic efficiency
ε h r Heat recovery efficiency
Subscripts
D Destroyed
in Input
out Output
G Gases
VC Control volume
o Reference condition
The energy balance applied to each component of the proposed configurations is presented in Table A1.
Table A1. Energy balances for the components of each configuration.
Different Configurations of Residual Heat Recovery Systems Using ORC
SORC
RORC
Heat Exchanger 1 (ITC1) Q G ˙ = m ˙ 10 C P 10 ( T 10 − T 11 ) = m ˙ A T C P A T ( T 4 A T − T 3 A T ) (A1) (A1) (A1)
Pump 1 (B1) η B 1 = υ 2 A T ( P 3 A T − P 2 A T ) h 3 A T − h 2 A T (A2)
W ˙ B 1 = m ˙ A T ( h 3 A T − h 2 A T ) (A3) (A2) (A2)
Heat Exchanger (ITC2) Zone 1 (Preheating)
Q ˙ Z 1 = m ˙ A T ( h A T f − h 2 A T ) = m ˙ O R C ( h 4 f O R C − h 4 O R C ) (A4)
Zone 2 (Evaporation)
Q ˙ Z 2 = m ˙ A T ( h A T g − h A T f ) = m ˙ Z 2 ( h f g O R C ) (A5)
Zone 3 (Overheating)
Q ˙ Z 3 = m ˙ A T ( h 1 A T − h A T g ) = m ˙ O R C ( h 1 O R C − h 4 g O R C ) (A6) Q ˙ Z 1 = m ˙ A T ( h A T f − h 2 A T = m ˙ O R C ( h 6 f O R C − h 6 O R C ) (A13)
Zone 2 (A5)
Q ˙ Z 3 = m ˙ A T ( h 1 A T − h A T g ) = m ˙ O R C ( h 1 O R C − h 4 g O R C ) (A14) Q ˙ Z 1 = m ˙ A T ( h A T f − h 2 A T ) = m ˙ O R C ( h 5 f O R C − h 5 O R C ) (A21)
Q ˙ Z 3 = m ˙ A T ( h 1 − 2 A T − h A T g ) = m ˙ 5 O R C ( h 2 O R C − h 5 g O R C ) (A22)
Turbine 1 (T1) η T 1 = h 1 O R C − h 2 O R C h 1 O R C − h 2 S O R C (A7)
W ˙ T 1 = m ˙ O R C ( h 1 O R C − h 2 O R C ) (A8) (A7)
(A8) η T 1 = h 2 ′ ′ O R C − h 3 O R C h 2 ′ ′ O R C − h 3 S O R C (A29)
W ˙ T 1 = ( m ˙ 5 O R C + m ˙ 6 O R C ) ( h 2 ′ ′ O R C − h 3 O R C ) (A30)
Heat Exchanger (ITC3) Cooling Q ˙ Z E = m ˙ O R C ( h 2 O R C − h 2 g O R C ) = m ˙ 1 A ( h 2 A − h 1 g A ) (A9)
Q ˙ Z C = m ˙ Z C ( h 2 g O R C − h 3 O R C ) = m ˙ 1 A ( h 1 g A − h 1 A ) (A10) Q ˙ Z E = m ˙ O R C ( h 3 O R C − h 3 g O R C ) = m ˙ 1 A ( h 2 A − h 1 g A ) (A15)
Q ˙ Z C = m ˙ Z C ( h 3 g O R C − h 4 O R C ) = m ˙ 1 A ( h 1 g A − h 1 A ) (A16) (A15)
Pump 2 (B2) η B 2 = υ 3 O R C ( P 4 O R C − P 3 O R C ) h 4 O R C − h 3 O R C (A11)
W ˙ B 2 = m ˙ O R C ( h 4 O R C − h 3 O R C ) (A12) η B 2 = υ 4 O R C ( P 5 O R C − P 4 O R C ) h 5 O R C − h 4 O R C
W ˙ B 2 = m ˙ O R C ( h 5 O R C − h 4 O R C ) (A18) η B 2 = υ 4 O R C ( P 5 O R C − P 4 O R C ) h 5 O R C − h 4 O R C (A27)
W ˙ B 2 = ( m ˙ 5 O R C + m ˙ 6 O R C ) ( h 5 O R C − h 4 O R C ) (A28)
RC - ε R C = T 2 O R C − T 3 O R C T 2 O R C − T 5 O R C (A19)
Q ˙ R C = m ˙ O R C ( h 6 O R C − h 5 O R C ) = m ˙ O R C ( h 2 O R C − h 3 O R C ) (A20) -
Turbine 2 (T2) - - η T 2 = h 1 O R C − h 2 ′ O R C h 1 O R C − h 2 ′ S O R C (A25)
W ˙ T 2 = m ˙ 6 O R C ( h 1 O R C − h 2 ′ O R C ) (A26)
Pump 3 (B3) - - η B 3 = υ 5 O R C ( P 6 O R C − P 5 O R C ) h 6 O R C − h 5 O R C (A31)
W ˙ B 3 = m ˙ 6 O R C ( h 6 O R C − h 5 O R C ) (A32)
Heat Exchanger (ITC4) - - Q ˙ Z 1 = m ˙ A T ( h A T f − h 1 − 2 A T ) = m ˙ 6 O R C ( h 6 f O R C − h 6 O R C ) (A23)
Q ˙ Z 3 = m ˙ A T ( h 1 A T − h 1 − A T g ) = m ˙ 6 O R C ( h 1 O R C − h 6 g O R C ) (A24)
The properties of the main currents of the heat recovery system proposed with SORC are presented in Table A2.
Table A2. Properties considered for SORC configuration.
Flow (kg/s)
P (kPa)
Enthalpy (kJ/kg)
Entropy(S-S0) (kJ/kg K)
Exergy (kW)
10 2.77 102.30 435.07 −1960.35 0.90 541.20
1 AT 1.64 101.43 307.84 461.66 0.94 208.75
1 ATg 1.64 91.42 246.29 324.52 0.73 106.76
1 ATf 1.64 81.01 178.30 183.24 0.47 29.12
2 AT 1.64 68.15 142.65 113.96 0.31 5.90
3 AT 1.64 170.38 142.77 114.19 0.31 5.96
1 ORC 0.72 675.85 272.84 633.29 1.80 169.27
2 ORC 0.72 22.53 202.37 513.72 1.87 69.79
2 gORC 0.72 22.53 65.00 301.64 1.34 31.18
3 ORC 0.72 22.53 65.00 −87.53 0.19 2.35
4 ORC 0.72 675.85 65.31 −86.47 0.19 2.93
4 fORC 0.72 675.85 194.20 181.72 0.86 50.17
4 gORC 0.72 675.85 194.20 477.95 1.50 124.68
1 A 13.32 101.30 50.00 209.42 0.27 35.20
1 gA 13.32 101.30 55.00 230.33 0.33 54.44
The properties of the main currents of the heat recovery system proposed with RORC are presented in Table A3.
Table A3. Properties considered for RORC configuration.
1 ATf 1.51 83.89 294.56 431.40 0.98 126.19
2 AT 1.51 68.15 209.28 246.22 0.65 26.27
3 AT 1.51 170.38 209.40 246.46 0.65 26.37
2 ORC 0.89 22.53 268.70 638.39 2.11 132.31
6 ORC 0.89 675.85 194.20 199.42 0.90 68.29
The properties of the main currents of the heat recovery system proposed with DORC are presented in Table A4.
Table A4. Properties considered for DORC configuration.
Entropy (S-S0) (kJ/kg K)
1 ATg 1.62 296.48 676.43 435.75 0.92 178.88
1 ATf 1.62 245.76 666.37 323.37 0.74 99.29
1-2 AT 1.62 171.41 656.79 169.58 0.44 20.13
1-2 ATg 1.62 228.96 647.85 287.41 0.68 77.18
1-2 Atf 1.62 183.04 638.85 192.71 0.49 29.19
1A 8.40 50.00 101.30 209.42 0.27 27.60
1g A 8.40 55.00 101.30 230.33 0.33 42.69
1 ORC 0.45 281.58 1351.69 635.64 1.75 159.64
2 ORC 0.62 136.41 450.56 53.17 0.57 13.75
3 ORC 1.08 65.00 22.53 298.79 1.34 46.85
3g ORC 1.08 65.00 22.53 301.64 1.34 47.17
5 ORC 1.08 65.21 450.56 −86.84 0.19 4.13
5f ORC 0.62 173.04 450.56 132.93 0.76 24.32
5g ORC 0.62 173.04 450.56 447.79 1.46 70.24
6 ORC 0.45 65.64 1351.69 −85.38 0.20 3.10
6f ORC 0.45 235.75 1351.69 283.87 1.07 68.73
6g ORC 0.45 235.75 1351.69 535.81 1.56 132.70
Nawi, Z.M.; Kamarudin, S.; Abdullah, S.S.; Lam, S. The potential of exhaust waste heat recovery (WHR) from marine diesel engines via organic rankine cycle. Energy 2019, 166, 17–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Alshammari, F.; Pesyridis, A.; Karvountzis-Kontakiotis, A.; Franchetti, B.; Pesmazoglou, Y. Experimental study of a small scale organic Rankine cycle waste heat recovery system for a heavy duty diesel engine with focus on the radial inflow turbine expander performance. Appl. Energy 2018, 215, 543–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Liu, P.; Shu, G.; Tian, H.; Wang, X.; Yu, Z. Alkanes based two-stage expansion with interheating Organic Rankine cycle for multi-waste heat recovery of truck diesel engine. Energy 2018, 147, 337–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Michos, C.N.; Lion, S.; Vlaskos, I.; Taccani, R. Analysis of the backpressure effect of an Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) evaporator on the exhaust line of a turbocharged heavy duty diesel power generator for marine applications. Energy Convers. Manag. 2017, 132, 347–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Patel, P.S.; Doyle, E.F. Compounding the Truck Diesel Engine with an Organic Rankine-Cycle System; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 1976. [Google Scholar]
Peris, B.; Navarro-Esbrí, J.; Molés, F. Bottoming organic Rankine cycle configurations to increase Internal Combustion Engines power output from cooling water waste heat recovery. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2013, 61, 364–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Yu, G.; Shu, G.; Tian, H.; Wei, H.; Liu, L. Simulation and thermodynamic analysis of a bottoming Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) of diesel engine (DE). Energy 2013, 51, 281–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Lu, Y.; Wang, Y.; Dong, C.; Wang, L.; Roskilly, A.P. Design and assessment on a novel integrated system for power and refrigeration using waste heat from diesel engine. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2015, 91, 591–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Vaja, I.; Gambarotta, A. Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) bottoming with Organic Rankine Cycles (ORCs). Energy 2010, 35, 1084–1093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Kalina, J. Integrated biomass gasification combined cycle distributed generation plant with reciprocating gas engine and ORC. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2011, 31, 2829–2840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Mingshan, W.; Jinli, F.; Chaochen, M.; Noman, D.S. Waste heat recovery from heavy-duty diesel engine exhaust gases by medium temperature ORC system. Sci. China Technol. Sci. 2011, 54, 2746–2753. [Google Scholar]
Yao, B.; Yang, F.; Zhang, H.; Wang, E.; Yang, K. Analyzing the Performance of a Dual Loop Organic Rankine Cycle System for Waste Heat Recovery of a Heavy-Duty Compressed Natural Gas Engine. Energies 2014, 7, 7794–7815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Yang, F.; Zhang, H.; Yu, Z.; Wang, E.; Meng, F.; Liu, H.; Wang, J. Parametric optimization and heat transfer analysis of a dual loop ORC (organic Rankine cycle) system for CNG engine waste heat recovery. Energy 2017, 118, 753–775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Yang, F.; Cho, H.; Zhang, H.; Zhang, J. Thermoeconomic multi-objective optimization of a dual loop organic Rankine cycle (ORC) for CNG engine waste heat recovery. Appl. Energy 2017, 205, 1100–1118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Wang, E.; Yu, Z.; Zhang, H.; Yang, F. A regenerative supercritical-subcritical dual-loop organic Rankine cycle system for energy recovery from the waste heat of internal combustion engines. Appl. Energy 2017, 190, 574–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Han, Y.; Kang, J.; Wang, X.; Liu, Z.; Tian, J.; Wang, Y. Modelling and simulation analysis of an ORC-FPC waste heat recovery system for the stationary CNG-fuelled compressor. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2015, 87, 481–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Song, S.; Zhang, H.; Zhao, R.; Meng, F.; Liu, H.; Wang, J.; Yao, B. Simulation and Performance Analysis of Organic Rankine Systems for Stationary Compressed Natural Gas Engine. Energies 2017, 10, 544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Liu, P.; Shu, G.; Tian, H.; Wang, X. Engine Load Effects on the Energy and Exergy Performance of a Medium Cycle/Organic Rankine Cycle for Exhaust Waste Heat Recovery. Entropy 2018, 20, 137. [Google Scholar]
Chacartegui, R.; Sánchez, D.; Múñoz, J.; Sánchez, T. Alternative ORC bottoming cycles FOR combined cycle power plants. Appl. Energy 2009, 86, 2162–2170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Qiu, K.; Hayden, A. Integrated thermoelectric and organic Rankine cycles for micro-CHP systems. Appl. Energy 2012, 97, 667–672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Drescher, U.; Brüggemann, D. Fluid selection for the Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) in biomass power and heat plants. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2007, 27, 223–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Mago, P.J.; Chamra, L.M.; Srinivasan, K.; Somayaji, C. An examination of regenerative organic Rankine cycles using dry fluids. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2008, 28, 998–1007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Kosmadakis, G.; Manolakos, D.; Kyritsis, S.; Papadakis, G. Comparative thermodynamic study of refrigerants to select the best for use in the high-temperature stage of a two-stage organic Rankine cycle for RO desalination. Desalination 2009, 243, 74–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Tchanche, B.F.; Papadakis, G.; Lambrinos, G.; Frangoudakis, A. Fluid selection for a low-temperature solar organic Rankine cycle. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2009, 29, 2468–2476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Tian, H.; Shu, G.; Wei, H.; Liang, X.; Liu, L. Fluids and parameters optimization for the organic Rankine cycles (ORCs) used in exhaust heat recovery of Internal Combustion Engine (ICE). Energy 2012, 47, 125–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Hung, T.-C.; Lee, D.-S.; Lin, J.-R. An Innovative Application of a Solar Storage Wall Combined with the Low-Temperature Organic Rankine Cycle. Int. J. Photoenergy 2014, 2014, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Zare, V. A comparative exergoeconomic analysis of different ORC configurations for binary geothermal power plants. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 105, 127–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Fontalvo, A.; Solano, J.; Pedraza, C.; Bula, A.; Quiroga, A.G.; Padilla, R.V. Energy, Exergy and Economic Evaluation Comparison of Small-Scale Single and Dual Pressure Organic Rankine Cycles Integrated with Low-Grade Heat Sources. Entropy 2017, 19, 476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Calise, F.; D'Accadia, M.D.; Macaluso, A.; Piacentino, A.; Vanoli, L. Exergetic and exergoeconomic analysis of a novel hybrid solar–geothermal polygeneration system producing energy and water. Energy Convers. Manag. 2016, 115, 200–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Kerme, E.D.; Orfi, J. Exergy-based thermodynamic analysis of solar driven organic Rankine cycle. J. Therm. Eng. 2015, 1, 192–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Jouhara, H.; Sayegh, M.A. Energy efficient thermal systems and processes. Therm. Sci. Eng. Prog. 2018, 7, e1–e2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Chen, T.; Zhuge, W.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, L. A novel cascade organic Rankine cycle (ORC) system for waste heat recovery of truck diesel engines. Energy Convers. Manag. 2017, 138, 210–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Moran, M.J.; Saphiro, H.N.; Boettner, D.D.; Bailey, M.B. Fundamentals of Engineering Thermodynamics; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
Quoilin, S.; Aumann, R.; Grill, A.; Schuster, A.; Lemort, V.; Spliethoff, H. Dynamic modeling and optimal control strategy of waste heat recovery Organic Rankine Cycles. Appl. Energy 2011, 88, 2183–2190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Mathworks. Matlab: Computer Program; The MatlabWorks Inc.: Denver, CO, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
Lemmon, E.W.; Huber, M.L.; McLinden, M.O. NIST Standard Reference Database 23: Reference Fluid Thermodynamic and Transport Properties-REFPROP, Version 9.1.; Technical Report; National Institute of Standards and Technology: Gaithersburg, MD, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
Trindade, A.B.; Palacio, J.C.E.; González, A.M.; Orozco, D.J.R.; Lora, E.E.S.; Renó, M.L.G.; Del Olmo, O.A. Advanced exergy analysis and environmental assesment of the steam cycle of an incineration system of municipal solid waste with energy recovery. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 157, 195–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Val, C.G.F.; De Oliveira, S., Jr. Deep Water Cooled ORC for Offshore Floating Oil Platform Applications. Int. J. Thermodyn. 2017, 20, 229–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
El-Emam, R.S.; Dincer, I. Exergy and exergoeconomic analyses and optimization of geothermal organic Rankine cycle. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2013, 59, 435–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Uusitalo, A.; Honkatukia, J.; Turunen-Saaresti, T.; Larjola, J. A thermodynamic analysis of waste heat recovery from reciprocating engine power plants by means of Organic Rankine Cycles. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2014, 70, 33–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Feng, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Li, B.; Yang, J.; Shi, Y. Comparison between regenerative organic Rankine cycle (RORC) and basic organic Rankine cycle (BORC) based on thermoeconomic multi-objective optimization considering exergy efficiency and levelized energy cost (LEC). Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 96, 58–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Lai, N.A.; Wendland, M.; Fischer, J. Working fluids for high-temperature organic Rankine cycles. Energy 2011, 36, 199–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Desai, N.B.; Bandyopadhyay, S. Process integration of organic Rankine cycle. Energy 2009, 34, 1674–1686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Rayegan, R.; Tao, Y.X. A procedure to select working fl uids for Solar Organic Rankine Cycles (ORCs). Renew. Energy 2011, 36, 659–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Guzovi, Z. The comparision of a basic and a dual-pressure ORC (Organic Rankine Cycle): Geothermal Power Plant Velika Ciglena case study. Energy 2015, 76, 175–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Minea, V. Power generation with ORC machines using low-grade waste heat or renewable energy. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2014, 69, 143–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Nami, H.; Mohammadkhani, F.; Ranjbar, F. Utilization of waste heat from GTMHR for hydrogen generation via combination of organic Rankine cycles and PEM electrolysis. Energy Convers. Manag. 2016, 127, 589–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Jenbacher JMS-612 GS-N. L natural gas engine.
Figure 2. Physical structure of the waste heat recovery (WHR) system, (a) Simple organic Rankine cycle (SORC), (b) ORC with Recuperator (RORC), and (c) ORC with Double Pressure (DORC).
Figure 3. Thermal efficiency of the ORC as a function of the turbine inlet pressure for (a) R-11, (b) R-134a.
Figure 4. Exergy destruction by heat recovery system component (a) SORC, (b) RORC, and (c) DORC.
Figure 5. Performance of SORC, RORC, and DORC configurations with different organic fluids, (a) Net power, (b) Absolute increase in thermal efficiency, (c) Absolute decrease in specific fuel consumption, (d) Global energy conversion efficiency, (e) ORC thermal efficiency, and (f) Global exergetic efficiency.
Figure 6. Exergy destruction by component as a function of evaporating pressure for (a–c) configuration SORC, (d–f) configuration RORC, and (g–i) configuration DORC.
Figure 7. Performance of SORC, RORC, and DORC configurations with different engine loads: (a) Net power, (b) Absolute increase in thermal efficiency, (c) Specific fuel consumption of engine–ORC, (d) Overall energy conversion efficiency, (e) ORC thermal efficiency, and (f) Overall exergetic efficiency.
Table 1. Main design and operation parameters of Jenbacher JMS 612 GS-N. L engine.
Cylinder capacity 74.852 L
Compression ratio 10.5 –
Number of cylinders (In V–60°) 12 –
Stroke length 220 mm
Diameter in chamber 190 mm
Maximum torque 60.66 kN⋅m
Power at nominal speed 1820 kW
Nominal speed 1500 rpm
Ignition system Spark ignition –
Minimum load capacity 1000 kW
Maximum load capacity 1982 kW
λ at minimum load 1.79 –
λ at maximum load 1.97 –
Exhaust gases O2 concentration 9.45–10.52 % volume
Exhaust gases CO concentration 588–731 mg/m3
Exhaust gases NOx concentration 461–468 mg/m3
Exhaust gases NO2 concentration 317–368 mg/m3
Exhaust gases NO concentration 65–95 mg/m3
Table 2. Fuel composition and supply conditions for the Jenbacher JMS 2 GS-N. L engine.
Description Value Units
Methane (CH4) 97.97 %
Nitrogen (N2) 1.50 %
Ethane (C2H6) 0.25 %
Carbon dioxide (CO2) 0.16 %
Fuel–air mixture supply pressure 1.15–1.25 bar
Uncorrected volumetric ratio 110–140 L/s
Table 3. Parameters considered for internal combustion engines (ICE) simulation.
Gas flow 120 L/min
λ 1.784 -
n ˙ rev 1482 rpm
Gas pressure 1163.6 mbar
Throttle valve 80.0 %
Turbo bypass valve 9.1 %
Gas temperature 389 °C
Engine coolant temperature 63.9 °C
Table 4. Performance indicators for ICE.
Mechanical engine power 1758.77 kW
Effective engine efficiency 38.59 %
Heat recovery efficiency 40.78 %
Heat removed from exhaust gases 514.85 kW
Specific engine fuel consumption 177.65 g/kWh
Table 5. Parameters considered for proposed configurations (S = SORC, R = RORC, and DP = DORC).
S/R/DP Isentropic efficiency turbines 80 % [38]
S/R/DP Isentropic efficiency pumps 75 % [38]
S/R/DP Cooling water temperature (T1A) 50 °C
S/R/DP Pinch Point condenser (ITC3) 15 °C
S/R Pressure Ratio B1 2.5
DP Pressure Ratio B1 11.09
S/R/DP Pinch Point evaporators (ITC2) (ITC4) 35 °C
R Recovery Effectiveness (RC) 85 % [38]
DP Pressure Ratio B2 20
DP Pressure Ratio B3 9
S/R Pressure Ratio B2 30
Table 6. Fuel-Product definition for each configuration.
Different Configurations of Waste Heat Recovery Systems Using ORC
I1 E ˙ x 10 E ˙ x 1 A T . − E ˙ x 3 A T E ˙ x 11 E ˙ 10 E ˙ 1 A T − E ˙ 3 A T E ˙ 11 E ˙ x 10 E ˙ x 1 A T − E ˙ x 3 A T E ˙ x 11
B1 W ˙ B 1 E ˙ x 3 A T − E ˙ x 2 A T . - W ˙ B 1 E ˙ x 3 A T − E ˙ x 2 A T - W ˙ B 1 E ˙ x 3 A T − E ˙ x 2 A T -
ITC2 E ˙ x 1 A T − E ˙ x 2 A T E ˙ x 1 O R C − E ˙ x 4 O R C - E ˙ x 1 A T − E ˙ x 2 A T E ˙ x 1 O R C − E ˙ x 6 O R C - E ˙ x 1 − 2 A T − E ˙ x 2 A T E ˙ x 2 O R C − E ˙ x 5 O R C -
T1 E ˙ x 1 O R C − E ˙ x 2 O R C W ˙ T 1 - E ˙ x 1 O R C − E ˙ x 2 O R C W ˙ T 1 - E ˙ x 2 ″ O R C − E ˙ x 3 W ˙ T 1 -
ITC3 - E ˙ 2 A . - - E ˙ 2 A - - E ˙ 2 A
B2 W ˙ B 2 E ˙ x 4 O R C − E ˙ x 3 O R C - W ˙ B 2 E ˙ x 5 O R C − E ˙ x 4 O R C - W ˙ B 2 E ˙ x 5 O R C − E ˙ x 4 O R C -
RC - - - E ˙ x 2 O R C − E ˙ x 3 O R C E ˙ x 6 O R C − E ˙ x 5 O R C - - - -
T2 - - - - - - E ˙ x 1 O R C − E ˙ x 2 ′ O R C W ˙ T 2 -
B3 - - - - - - W ˙ B 3 E ˙ x 6 O R C − E ˙ x 5 O R C -
ITC4 - - - - - - E ˙ x 1 A T − E ˙ x 1 − 2 A T E ˙ x 1 O R C − E ˙ x 6 O R C -
Table 7. Data used from the system for model validation.
η P
η T
Tsource (°C)
F (kg/s)
T s o u r c e (°C)
Pinch Point (°C)
P v a p (MPa)
SORC 0.8 0.7 250 2.737 35 30 0.8–5.5
RORC 0.95 0.89 165 84.36 15 10 0.31
Table 8. Validation of the proposed model for RORC.
Valencia et al.
Emam et al. [39]
Zare et al. [27]
T 1 A T ( ° C ) 165 165 165
m ˙ 1 A T ( kg / s ) 84.36 84.36 82.16
m ˙ 1 O R C ( kg / s ) 75.22 78.06 76.09
A I T C 2 ( m 2 ) 394.21 399.30 390.60
A R C ( m 2 ) 124.58 124.80 124.20
η t h ( % ) 16.25 16.37 16.15
η e x e ( % ) 48.71 48.80 48.54
Table 9. Parameters of an integrated recovery system with engine and ORC. BSFC: brake-specific fuel consumption.
Thermal efficiency engine–ORC 40.45 41.25 40.72 %
Increased thermal efficiency 1.86 2.66 2.13 %
Thermal efficiency ORC 16.40 23.51 18.74 %
Global energy conversion efficiency 6.68 9.59 7.66 %
Global exergetic efficiency 34.5 49.47 39.43 %
BSFC engine–ORC 169.5 166.21 168.42 g/kWh
Table 10. Exergy analysis results for each component of the heat recovery system with SORC.
Input (kW)
Product (kW)
E ˙ x D (kW)
Lost (kW)
ITC1 541.202051 202.794262 41.9535673 296.454222
B1 0.37472727 0.05848531 0.31624196 –
ITC2 202.852748 166.340104 36.5126437 –
T1 99.4808146 85.5899807 13.8908338 –
ITC3 – – 36.0581887 66.5877282
Table 11. Exergy analysis results for each component of the heat recovery system with RORC. RC: internal recovery unit.
ITC1 541.202051 237.549898 7.197931 296.454222
ITC2 237.645881 203.818309 33.827572 –
T1 139.797975 122.396844 17.40113113 –
ITC3 – – 15.3197 71.5691491
B2 0.94533621 0.7336153 0.21172091 –
RC 86.4902041 64.620999 21.8692051 –
Table 12. Exergy analysis results for each component of the heat recovery system with DORC.
ITC1 541.20 203.57 31.15 296.45
B1 1.66 0.26 1.40 –
ITC2 113.18 101.93 11.26 –
T1 95.39 79.75 15.63 –
ITC3 – – 31.01 6.00
T2 10.27 8.77 1.49 –
ITC4 90.64 52.66 37.99 –


text:
@interface CCViewController ()

@end

@implementation CCViewController

- (void)viewDidLoad
{
    [super viewDidLoad];
	// Do any additional setup after loading the view, typically from a nib.
    CCUser *user = [[CCUser alloc]init];
    user.name = @"张三";
    user.uid = 100;
    [user getUserName:^(NSString *name) {
        NSLog(@"获取到用户名:%@",name);
    }];
}

- (void)didReceiveMemoryWarning
{
    [super didReceiveMemoryWarning];
    // Dispose of any resources that can be recreated.
}

@end

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Home / Press Mentions / The Real Deal Credits Adam Leitman Bailey as First Lawyer in NYC to Use the ILSA Provision to Get Buyers Out of Contracts in Wake of The Financial Crisis
The Real Deal Credits Adam Leitman Bailey as First Lawyer in NYC to Use the ILSA Provision to Get Buyers Out of Contracts in Wake of The Financial Crisis
By Adam Leitman Bailey
https://www.alblawfirm.com/press-mentions/ilsa-provision/
By: Hiten Samati
The U.S. House of Representatives handed condominium developers a significant victory Thursday, unanimously passing a bill that exempts condos from filing and registration requirements mandated by the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act, commonly referred to as ILSA.
Under the bill, known as H.R. 2600, developers of new condos or time-shares with at least 99 units will no longer have to register their buildings with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Though the law was seldom used in New York City since it was first passed in 1968 — in part because of similar, if not stronger, state protections — it became a sort of messiah for condo buyers looking to get out of their deposits after the 2008 market crash, spawning a cottage industry of federal litigation, as The Real Deal reported. Buyers could overturn contracts even when developers made seemingly trivial ILSA filing errors.
"During the economic downturn some buyers used ILSA to rescind otherwise valid condominium contracts for economic reasons — an entirely unintended consequence of the law and its intent," Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, D-N.Y., who sponsored the bill along with Michael Grimm, R-N.Y., Patrick T. McHenry, R.-N.C., and Jerrold Nadler, D.-N.Y., said in a statement.
"By providing this clarity, condominium developers and their lenders will have more certainty going forward about the status of their sales as the economy continues to recover — while maintaining important protections that consumers have under ILSA," Maloney added.
The bipartisan bill will now make its way to the U.S. Senate, where, if approved, it will go to the White House to be signed into law.
Steven Spinola, president of the powerful Real Estate Board of New York, which has been lobbying for the legislation, hailed Congress for "closing this very damaging loophole." The bill, Spinola said in a statement to REBNY members obtained by The Real Deal, would provide "tremendous bureaucratic relief from substantial filings that are duplicative, and sometimes contradictory, to state disclosure requirements."
The bill also retained ILSA's anti-fraud provisions, which allow a buyer to pull out of a contract in case of fraud, Spinola noted.
Real estate attorney Adam Leitman Bailey, who is credited with being the first lawyer in New York City to use the ILSA provision to get buyers out of contracts in the wake of the financial crisis, said that H.R. 2600 was a testament to "the incredible influence that the most powerful real estate developers have over the federal government. Despite the major problems afflicting our nation and the failure to have laws passed to address them, somehow, this small issue only affecting condominium [developments] over 100 units got the attention of and passed the House of Representatives."…
Adam Leitman Bailey… acknowledged today that ILSA was "anachronistic," but said that it had provided "the machinery to keep the sale of apartments going during the great crisis.
"Invoking ILSA allowed buyers to pressure sponsors into giving sales discounts at least equal to the amount the lenders withdrew from buyers who could no longer close without their money," Adam Leitman Bailey said.
Since 2008, ILSA had evolved into a loophole that allowed an informed buyer to head for the hills based on a "trivial technicality" when the markets deteriorated, said residential market maven and Miller Samuel CEO Jonathan Miller.
The new bill would likely reduce litigation exposure for developers, yet reemphasize the consumer protections that were the law's original intent, Miller added. "Sanity and fairness restored."
Condominium & Cooperative Representation Real Estate Litigation Buyouts and Sale of Apartment Lease Tenant Representation Condominium & Cooperative Litigation Condominium & Cooperative Owner & Shareholder Representation
Adam Leitman Bailey

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Hubble telescope witnesses 'very weird' fast fade of Stingray nebula
NASA and ESA's space telescope caught sight of a nebula going through unprecedented changes.
Amanda Kooser
Freelance writer Amanda C. Kooser covers gadgets and tech news with a twist for CNET. When not wallowing in weird gear and iPad apps for cats, she can be found tinkering with her 1956 DeSoto.
Hubble's observations of the Stingray nebula in 1996 and 2016 show the dramatic changes in the glowing gases.
NASA, ESA, B. Balick (University of Washington), M. Guerrero (Instituto de Astrofísica de Andalucía), and G. Ramos-Larios (Universidad de Guadalajara)
In a universe where processes are often measured in millions and billions of years, the Hubble Space Telescope witnessed something extraordinary over the course of just two decades. The Stringray nebula went from bright in 1996 to faded in 2016, as if it had been left hanging on a cosmic drying line.
Stingray, more formally known as Hen 3-1357, was hailed as the youngest known planetary nebula when it was first noticed. The nebula formed during the star's end of life when it ejected glowing gases that gave it a marine-animal-like shape.
What's so wild about the nebula is the radical makeover it has gone through in such a short amount of time. "Changes like this have never been captured at this clarity before," NASA said in a statement on Thursday, calling it "a rare look at a rapidly fading shroud of gas around an aging star."
NASA and the European Space Agency (ESA) jointly operate Hubble. Astronomers are taking notice of what both agencies described as "unprecedented" changes. The nebula had been emitting lots of nitrogen (red), hydrogen (blue) and oxygen (green), which gave it its distinct shape and glow in the original image.
Cosmic dead ringers: 27 super strange-looking space objects
"This is very, very dramatic, and very weird," said Hubble team member Martín Guerrero of the Instituto de Astrofísica de Andalucía in Spain. "What we're witnessing is a nebula's evolution in real time."
The culprit is likely the central star inside the nebula, which experienced a rapid rise in heat followed by a cooling phase. It seems Hubble got lucky with taking the images when it captured a before-and-after view of the nebula's wild swing. At this rate, NASA estimates it may be barely detectable within just a few decades.
NASA's Hubble Twitter account hopped on the "How it started/How it's going" meme with the before and after images of the nebula.
How it started / How it's going pic.twitter.com/084qoxvLNl
— Hubble (@NASAHubble) December 3, 2020
Despite being in orbit for an impressive 30 years, Hubble continues to feed us incredible cosmic discoveries, from soul-wrenching views of the distant universe to gorgeous portraits of Jupiter.


Turok 2: Seeds of Evil returns to the PC! The sequel to the hit game Turok is now available, featuring a host of enemies, weapons, missions, locations and a new multiplayer mode. Remastered for todays computers using a new engine with improved graphics, Turok 2 will transport players into sprawling environments with vicious enemies lurking behind every corner.
Fight your way through 35 different types of enemies with bouncing bellies, blinking eyes, stretching tentacles and snapping jaws. From Prehistoric Raptors, to evolved Flesh Eaters, to your final battle with the Mother of all beasts youll want to defeat all of them!
Enemies are intelligent! Theyre smart enough to attack in groups, to flee when they are outgunned, and to take cover during a firefight.
Split-screen mode is also available in network multiplayer. Lastly, a new multiplayer game mode called Last Turok Standing has been added.
Use the links below to get the latest version of the Turok 2: Seeds of Evil game. If you are Windows PC, Mac or Linux user, then just click Download to get the game. Please note that this game may ask for additional in-app purchases and permissions when installed.
There's not a lot of questions about Turok 2: Seeds of Evil. Ask insistently in the comments so you can make it frequent!


Scientists feed glitter to animals to mark their poop for study.
How a Canadian city is planning to become a world-class centre for wolf-positive research, education and eco-tourism.
Lost Cities VR wants to change the way we play games.


Dr. Wright just received the 2011 "Compassionate Doctor Award" as voted on by patients nationwide. Perhaps the greatest honor a doctor can receive is the appreciation of his patients. This annual award honors the top 2% of United States physicians.
Patients have gone out of their way to provide feedback about their experiences, rating physicians on various aspects of the care they provide, including bedside manner, time spent with patients, courtesy of doctor's staff and office follow-up.. Those who rank consistently highly earn the Compassionate Doctor Award. While many physicians receive positive reviews from their patients, few receive sufficiently high accolades to qualify for this award.
This is the second year in a row Dr. Wright has received this great honor. Thanks to our patients for their continued appreciation of Dr. Wright and the Laser Vein Center.


As we close out 2014, it's good to focus on what's ahead. Shirley offers us great advice, hope and help from The Harvest Table. Grab a cup of tea or coffee, and let her words steep into your soul.
Somewhere deep in our souls, we are aware that God created us with a plan in mind. He chose our gender, our birth date, the color of our eyes, our ethnic makeup, our place of birth, our parents and our siblings. You had no choice in any of this because He had determined that there would never be anyone else just like you. You are and will always be an "original". He has never had any interest in "copies"...or "clones"...He is fascinated with the genuine you and who you are becoming.
Even as you originated in the mind of God, He had specific purposes for giving you life. He, Who could see the end from the beginning, sent each of us forth "pre-programmed" to accomplish His will in this world. We were designed and gifted to achieve His purposes for us.
"For we are God's (own) handiwork (His workmanship), recreated in Christ Jesus,(born anew) that we may do those good works which God predestined (planned beforehand) for us (taking paths which He prepared ahead of time), that we should walk in them (living the good life which He prearranged and made ready for us to live)." Amplified Bible.
Most of us, at some point in life, had our own dreams for our future. Glamorous, exciting, adventurous dreams that we were sure would ensure our personal happiness for the rest of our lives. After all, these lives belonged to us to pick and choose as we liked, didn't they? But, in many cases, those dreams were empty promises that never came to pass. Those goals that we set for ourselves all turned to ashes, and we began to ask ourselves and our God the hard questions.
"Have I missed my 'calling' in life?"
"Why do I feel "useless"?"
"Surely there is more to life than this!"
"Lord, is it too late to do something of significance for your kingdom?"
"Is it possible to get another chance?"
"Can I start over at this point?"
It has always been God's responsibility to reveal His will to His creatures. Apart from revelation, it is impossible to fathom His heart.
"For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor My ways, your ways, saith the Lord."
It is our responsibility to obey implicitly the revealed will of God. Yet in mercy, He will repeat Himself as many times as it takes for you to grasp what He is saying. We start by paying attention to the will of God revealed in our Bible. Those things plainly spoken in His written will. From there, ask him, "What does this look like in my life?". Seek His will for the day. He may instruct you to catch up on the laundry, write a letter, make a phone call. He may send someone to your door in need of your help, or in need of your time and council. As you begin to serve others, as you begin to share your life in any way He directs, it will become easier to "know" His will for you, personally.
He says to us, "Despise not the days of small beginnings," and again, "He who is faithful in little, I will make him ruler over much".
The task isn't the important thing, your obedience is the important thing!
Be aware, "those who DO the will of God, will KNOW the will of God".
Pursuing your "personal purpose" will always require setting your likes and dislikes aside as you seek first His will.
At times it will be delightful.
At other times, it will be wearisome.
And at other times you will be elated and excited to be a part of what He has entrusted to you.
Remember, emotions come and go and are as fickle as fickle can be.
"Well done, good and faithful servant. Enter into the joy of your Lord." On the day you meet face-to-face "His joy" will fill you with "joy unspeakable"
No words will be necessary for you will "know" Him and at long last your soul will find utter and complete satisfaction beyond all you had hoped or imagined.
thsnks shirley keep up the goooood work. you'er helping me so very much.
Refreshing to see someone mention "Personal Purpose" - everything in Communal these days... Truth is - we don't all have the same purpose or Calling! Besides the fact that we all need Christ.
U write good Shirley !!


text:
May 11, 2019 by Clay
Song of the Day #3,963: 'Murder by Numbers' – The Police
'Murder by Numbers,' the final track on The Police's classic 1983 album Synchronicity, wasn't originally intended for the album's lineup. Indeed, it was left off of some LP releases of the album, though it appeared on cassette and CD.
The song started as the B-side of Synchronicity's most popular track, 'Every Breath You Take.'
'Murder by Numbers' was co-written by guitarist Andy Summers, whose only other songwriting contribution on the album was 'Mother,' by far the record's worst track. He did just fine here, though, coming up with a seductive jazz-pop arrangement.
Sting's satirical lyrics lay out the advice of a serial killer on how best to dispatch of people, ultimately landing on the fact that the best way is to become a politician, allowing you to kill multitudes without raising a finger.
Televangelist Jimmy Swaggart missed the point and attacked the song as a product of "the sons of Satan." Several years later, Swaggart was mired in a sex scandal after he was caught cavorting with prostitutes.
Once that you've decided on a killing
First you make a stone of your heart
And if you find that your hands are still willing
Then you can turn a murder into art
There really isn't any need for bloodshed
You just do it with a little more finesse
If you can slip a tablet into someone's coffee
Then it avoids an awful lot of mess
It's murder by numbers, 1, 2, 3
It's as easy to learn as your ABC
Murder by numbers, 1, 2, 3
Now if you have a taste for this experience
And you're flushed with your very first success
Then you must try a twosome or a threesome
And you'll find your conscience bothers you much less
Because murder is like anything you take to
It's a habit-forming need for more and more
You can bump off every member of your family
And anybody else you find a bore
Because it's murder by numbers, 1, 2, 3
Now you can join the ranks of the illustrious
In history's great dark hall of fame
All our greatest killers were industrious
At least the ones that we all know by name
But you can reach the top of your profession
If you become the leader of the land
For murder is the sport of the elected
And you don't need to lift a finger of your hand
It's as easy to learn as your ABCDE
This entry was posted in random weekends and tagged Murder by Numbers, Synchronicity, The Police.
One thought on "Song of the Day #3,963: 'Murder by Numbers' – The Police"
Dana Gallup says:
I never had listened close enough to the last verse to catch the political reference. I've always been a fan of this song though. Not a fan of Swaggert though.😀


For learners who have completed the level 1 ITQ course or who have skills equivalent to level 1 (achieved through similar level 1 qualifications or skills learnt at work or school). This is a full Level 2 ITQ qualification designed to assess the core applications that a user requires. Units include Word Processing, Spreadsheets, Presentation software and Improving Productivity using ICT. On successful completion of this course you will be awarded the BCS Level 2 Certificate in IT User Skills (ECDL Extra) (ITQ) qualification.
Course books are required at an additional cost.


The revised American National Standard Practice for Occupational and Educational Eye and Face Protection (Z87.1-1989), was approved in February 1989 by the American National Standards Institute, Inc. (ANSI).
The eyes and face must be protected from a variety of hazards, including impact (chipping, grinding, etc.), radiation (welding, glassblowing, carbon arcs, kilns, foundries) and chemical splash (acids, caustics, etc.). Safety equipment chosen should state that it meets the ANSI standard. All eye and face protection devices meeting this standard have "Z87" stamped on them. Z87.1-1989 states that its scope applies to occupational and educational operations and processes where face and eye hazards exist, including machining, welding, cutting, chemical handling, and assembly.
(Not applicable under this standard are hazards related to x-rays, gamma rays, high energy particulate radiation, microwaves, radio-frequency radiation, lasers and masers, and sports).
There are a few revisions between Z87.1-1979 and Z87.1-1989 that are worth mentioning. There is now identification of primary versus secondary eye and face protection.
Those protective devices that are secondary protectors are NOT adequate without additional primary protection. Primary protectors include spectacles and goggles. While spectacles and goggles are primary protectors, they certainly may be used in conjunction with secondary protectors such as welding helmets and face shields. Spectacles commonly protect the eye from impact and optical radiation. They sometimes are equipped with sideshields. Goggles protect the eye from a variety of hazards, and can be fitted to the eye like an eyecup, or fitted to the eye area on the face. This second type can be used in conjunction with spectacles worn underneath.
Face shields cover the whole face by means of headgear, and, as mentioned above, need to be used in conjunction with either goggles or spectacles to provide adequate protection. Similarly, welding helmets and hand shields provide additional protection from optical radiation and impact.
Z87.1-1989 has specific considerations concerning the ability to both remove and clean lenses or windows, optical requirements, flammability resistance, corrosion resistance, prescription lens, fit, ventilation, and lens shade and transmission for all four types of eye protectors. CSA's revised data sheet Eye and Face Protection will itemize and include this information in table form.
Z87.1-1989 also has instructions on use and maintenance, and a description of the tests that were conducted to account for recommendations and requirements.
The old standard, Z87.1-1979, included a table on the choice of filter lens shades. Different lens shades were specified for different welding and cutting operations. While Z87.1-1989 provides almost exactly the same ranges of lens shades for the same operations, the table with exact shade number recommendations is deleted. In discussing the table with the Z87 chairman, it seems that the Z87 Committee felt that it was impossible to specify each situation because of the great variation in welding processes.
They determined that if one selected a lens that was appropriate for the operation being done and the one with the darkest shade possible, safety conditions would be met. For more detailed itemization for welding procedures, one can consult ANSI Z49.1-1988 Safety in Welding and Cutting. There is a decrease in the shade number recommended for soldering; in Z87.1-1989, a lens shade from 1.5-3 is adequate, while previously a range from 3-4 was the shade recommended.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) includes in their proposed Personal Protective Equipment Standard (CFR 1910.133) a table much like the previous ANSI table of filter lens shades for protection against radiant energy. The adoption of this table was due to its practical format and easy readability. The only change between the proposed OSHA table and the old ANSI table is the decrease of the minimum lens shade recommended for soldering. OSHA suggests a shade number of 2, decreased from the previous ANSI minimum level of 3.
Infrared radiation is not specifically addressed in the new ANSI standard. In Table 1, which lists transmittance requirement for clear lens and general-purpose filters, there is a column for maximum infrared transmission, with lenses ranging from 25% transmission to a low of 0.3 transmission. Infrared transmission decreases with shade number. For looking in pottery or enameling kilns, use eye protection with a shade number between 1.7 and 3. For glassblowing and foundry work, a shade number of 3 is often used. Again, select the darkest lens or filter shade possible that allows accurate vision to meet safety conditions for both shade number and infrared transmission recommendations.
Consult CSA's revised data sheet on eye and face protection or ANSI at 1430 Broadway, New York, NY 10018 for more information on this topic.


Citing an industry-wide reduction in demand for new guns, the Remington Outdoor Company informed employees on Monday that a corporate-wide reduction in employees, mostly on the manufacturing side, will be coming in the next 30-days.
Primary Day is Today, Who's On the Ballot?
Primary election day is this Thursday, September 13th in New York State and there are some key races on the ballot, depending on which party you belong to. The primary was moved from Tuesday to Thursday this year because of 9/11 remembrance ceremonies.
State and local police agencies are at the scene of Remington Arms in Ilion. Witnesses say traffic is not being allowed near the factory.
Police in Utica are investigating an incident on Genesee Street in the city after a person apparently fell from the the Adirondack Bank building.
Central Valley Academy's Jarvis Middle School in Mohawk is on lockdown, due to a threat, according to school officials. More details to follow.
The CBS news program, 60 Minutes put the spotlight on Ilion Sunday evening with a Leslie Stahl segment that blames a faulty trigger on the Remington 700 rifle with multiple deaths and injuries.
First K-Mart is Closing – Now Macy's?
It's that time of year. We recently learned that K-Mart in New Hartford is closing and now Macy's has made a big nationwide announcement.
U.S. News and World Report has put out its annual list of America's Best High Schools and New Hartford Central School ranked highest among Central New York schools.
Former NFL star and Proctor graduate Will Smith was killed last night in New Orleans following a road rage incident in the city, according to NOLA.com.
All after-school activities in the Herkimer Central School District have been cancelled for today, following a social media threat. No other details are available at this time.


text:
'Prisoners of War' on Israeli TV
Israeli television is beginning to deal with the fate of IDF prisoners of war when they are caught by Arab terrorists – and what can come after.
Hana Levi Julian
Published: Apr 25, 2010, 4:45 PM (GMT+3)
Defense/Middle EastMediaIDF Missing Soldiers
Asi Levi, actor in Hatufim, between scenesIsrael news photo: PR
Israeli television is beginning to focus on what can happen to IDF soldiers when they are caught by Arab terrorists – and what can come after.
The fictional series, "Prisoners of War," (called "Hatufim" or "abductees" in Hebrew) revolves around the lives of three IDF reservists who are captured during service in Lebanon. Their fate initially is unknown, and they become symbols to the society from which they came. In their families, they are perceived as something between a misty memory, and an ever-lasting glimmer of hope – until the day 17 years later, when they return.
Only two come back alive. The third returns in a coffin.
The series follows the families, and the two remaining soldiers as they try to pick up the pieces of their lives. The questions asked as part of the program are troubling, as are the answers.
Gideon Raff, the show's creator, told the Los Angeles Times that his research revealed conflicting and complex issues. One soldier released in a prisoner exchange deal told him that for years, people blamed him for every terrorist attack that took place after the swap. Another Israeli POW said bitterly that Israel prefers dead heroes to live returnees.
Former POW David Senesh said recently in an interview that Israeli interrogations were worse than the physical brutality he suffered as a captive in Egypt.
"As a society we're busy with 'bringing the boys back home,'" Raff said. "We're preoccupied with their return and the price, but few turn their thoughts to the day after." He said he was surprised that no one had considered addressing the issue before, noting there are some 1,500 former POWs in Israel who "live with their captivity every day and can't get rid of it."
An American remake of the series will be offered in the United States through 20th Century Fox, which cut the deal with the Israeli network Keshet before the "Hatufim" series began shooting. Keshet provides half of the programming on Israel's Channel 2, where the show's seventh episode aired Saturday night.


Our skilled team are able to not only identify a problem very quickly but can also in most cases identify the make of PVCu profile used therefore matching the correct hardware, be it friction hinges, handles, espagnolettes or tilt and turn mechanisms to the correct profile, If your window sash will not close properly the most common reason is that the hinge has broken. We can replace this item to most UPVC systems. We can replace your existing handles that are broken or where the key is lost.


text:
Cortez Christmas Dinner will be Dec. 25 at county annex
By Jim Mimiaga Journal staff writer
Wednesday, Dec 7, 2022 1:17 PM Updated Friday, Dec. 9, 2022 9:23 AM
The annual Cortez Community Christmas dinner is made possible by volunteers and donations. (Journal file photo)
Kala Parkinson
Traditional meal will be takeout; delivery offered for the homebound
The 32nd Community Christmas Dinner will be held at the Montezuma County Annex on Christmas Day from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m.
The free meal will be available for takeout or delivery at 107 N. Chestnut St. in downtown Cortez. There will be drive-thru and walk-up stations.
For public safety, the traditional sit-down meal is not possible because of the rise in COVID-19 and flu cases.
The to-go meal is prepared by Hope's Kitchen of the Methodist Church in Cortez and a crew of volunteers, said organizer and pastor Jean Schwien.
On the menu is smoked ham, mashed sweet potatoes, potato wedges, salad, rolls, green beans, cranberry sauce and pie.
The salad and potatoes are sourced locally from Southwest Farm Fresh. The rolls are made by The Farm Bistro, and pies are being provided by the Salvation Army and Dunton Hot Springs.
Everyone will receive a gift of warm clothing from the Cortez Salvation Army.
Free delivery of a Christmas dinner is available for the homebound.
Salads and potatoes for the Christmas dinner are sourced locally from Southwest Farm Fresh. (Journal file photo)
"Everyone is welcome. We see all walks of life," Schwien said.
So far there are 20 volunteers, but more are needed. Volunteers are needed for kitchen help Christmas Eve and Christmas Day. Delivery drivers are needed on Christmas Day.
Food preparation is directed Hope's Kitchen chef Pat Downey. Preparations include 30 hams and 300 pounds of potatoes.
Schwien said they are preparing to serve 375 people, up from last year's 250.
The record 410 Thanksgiving meals served at the annual St. Barnabas Episcopal Church led to the increase for the Christmas dinner.
Inflation is hitting hard in blue-collar areas like Montezuma County, and the free Christmas dinner will provide some relief for people, Shwien said.
"Many people here live on a fixed income. Hopefully we make a difference. We don't want rising food costs to prevent people from a special Christmas meal," she said.
Free delivery is available for homebound residents.
"It's a way our community makes sure everyone has a good meal for Christmas," said said longtime volunteer and past coordinator Sharon King.
The meal serves families, single people, the homeless, students and travelers.
"People are so thankful for it, it really warms the heart," King said.
To volunteer or to donate, call Jean at 801-755-8616. To schedule a home delivery, contact Sharon at 970-529-6036.
The Christmas meal is offered at no charge and is made possible by volunteers and donations.
If you want to donate drop off cash or check with the Onward! A Legacy Foundation, 33 N. Chestnut St., Cortez, 81321, or visit the donation page for the Cortez Christmas Dinner at onwardfoundation.org


Bring a touch of class into your Bedroom with this 6 Piece Bedding Set. This bed in a bag set will add a touch of warmth and it will create a calm and relaxed atmosphere for your bedroom. Comforter sets are designed to keep you updated and fashionable in the most convenient and inexpensive way. Our comforter sets are a tremendous blend of bold and vibrant colors. They can transform a room from bleak to bright and cheery in a matter of minutes. Our comforter set will have your bedroom decorated with style. Turn your home into a haven with our beautiful comforter collection. Our comforters come in many sizes, including king comforters, Full comforters, and even California King comforter sets. We've included everything you need to make over your bedroom such as comforter, pillow shams, and bed skirts. Comforter sets are comfortable, durable and beautiful. Our comforter sets are designed for year around comfort.
This is a 3 Piece Kids Bedspread Set, Brighten up your kids room with this bright and colorful quilt set. Buy today and join the thousands of satisfied customers around the world who have purchased a OCEAN HOME FASHION COMPANY luxury quilt set. With so many vibrant patterns to choose from, choose your favorite and make a beautiful design impact to your bedroom. The rich array of colors will infuse warmth and personality into your home. You will understand why these quilt sets are consistently chosen by top decorators around the globe. Quilt Set Measurements: King Set: Quilt - 102" x 86", 2 Shams - 20" x 36" Full Set: Quilt - 76" x 86", 2 Shams - 20" x 26" Twin Set: Quilt - 68" x 86", 1 Sham - 20" x 30" Package Include: 1* quilt 76"x 86" 1* pillow sham 20"x 26" And if you are not happy with your quilt set for any reason, yes any reason at all, we will provide you with your choice of a replacement or a full refund. While many companies will ask you to pay hidden fees or make you fill out tedious return forms, our NO QUESTIONS ASKED GUARANTEE POLICY is also a no hassle 10 year guarantee policy. You ask and we shall return!!! Thank you for your shopping.
This is a 3Piece Kids Bedspread Set, Brighten up your kids room with this bright and colorful quilt set. Buy today and join the thousands of satisfied customers around the world who have purchased a OCEAN HOME FASHION COMPANY luxury quilt set. With so many vibrant patterns to choose from, choose your favorite and make a beautiful design impact to your bedroom. The rich array of colors will infuse warmth and personality into your home. You will understand why these quilt sets are consistently chosen by top decorators around the globe. Quilt Set Measurements: King Set: Quilt - 102" x 86", 2 Shams - 20" x 36" Full Set: Quilt - 76" x 86", 2 Shams - 20" x 30" Twin Set: Quilt - 68" x 86", 1 Sham - 20" x 30" Package Include: 1* quilt 76"x 86" 2* pillow sham 20"x 26" And if you are not happy with your quilt set for any reason, yes any reason at all, we will provide you with your choice of a replacement or a full refund. While many companies will ask you to pay hidden fees or make you fill out tedious return forms, our NO QUESTIONS ASKED GUARANTEE POLICY is also a no hassle 10 year guarantee policy. You ask and we shall return!!! Thank you for your shopping.
#1 Bed Sheet Set - Super Silky Soft - HIGHEST QUALITY 100% Brushed Microfiber 1800 Bedding CollectionsWrinkle, Fade, Stain Resistant - Hypoallergenic - Deep Pockets - Luxury Fitted & Flat Sheets, PillowcasesBest For Bedroom, Guest Room, Childrens Room, RV, Vacation Home, Bed in a Bag Addition - LIFETIME GUARANTEEMellanni Fine Linens wraps you in elegance, luxury and comfort. Indulge in silky soft, 100% brushed microfiber carefully crafted in every detailHere's What A Few Of Our Raving Fans Are Saying"Softest Sheets EVER!" "Best sheets I've ever slept on" "Best customer service on Amazon, Period" "Beats any other product"Microfiber sheets are breathable, keep moisture, dust mites and other allergens away, hypoallergenic. Comes in Twin, Full, Queen, King and California King.Perfect bedding sets for adults, kids, toddler, teen girls and boys.These luxuries bed sheets stay fresh, cool during hot nights and warm in cold nights - leaving you and your family rested and ready for a new day.Extremely soft and comfortable!The Best Unconditional Lifetime Guarantee, Included For Free!Our 100% no questions asked, no hassle money back or replacement guarantee is the best in the business. Order now!
Compare prices on Bed Sets For Teen Girls Full Size at ShoppinGent.com – use promo codes and coupons for best offers and deals. Start smart buying with ShoppinGent.com right now and choose your golden price on every purchase.